sam

Certainly a possibility. Others have mentioned Sony's very large gamut.

Don, check the f5/55 forums. Sounds like you may have read a portion of the14 pages worth on DVXuser. Also Photozone, and individual blog posts as well. The claim is not unsubstantiated. I should still have my lens test files, but unfortunately wont be returning home until mid April. (a likely story right ) However, the lenses (24-70ii 70-200ii, 50 Xenon FF) are adapted like I would imagine the vast majority of emount Sony's being used for video are. Grim, I mentioned that Sony's seem to "exacerbate" ca for whatever reason. "Amplify" in the way you've used it was not my intent. Thanks for the aberration 101! Again, I totally agree lens/adapter and have never stated otherwise. For whatever reason Sony cams just seem to make fringing even more apparent. Any one find multiple threads/posts/blogs about abnormal fringing from Panasonic users? Red? Black magic? Nikon? When we've countered, hypothesized, and explained away all of these posts from users on other forums who are obviously much less educated and experienced than our Wikipedia copying selves, we can go back to our ignorant bliss, admiring our sleek consumer cams collecting dust, dreaming all the while about custom Alexa luts. and how amazing our video will look to the 47 Vimeo users who stumble across it while searching for porn.

Rich, there is no debate as to the cause of the fringing and never has been on my end. (The 85 1.2) It's the amplification of fringing by a lot of Sony cams. Even high end cinema lenses (not that they are exempt from ca, but are somewhat of a known entity, repeatedly used across multiple cameras) have been shown to exhibit fringing even in the center of the image on a Sony. The same lens in same setting using (insert $$$ cinema cam here) doesn't show this fringing or at least the severity of it.

Not maligning your tool of choice Don. On other threads, blogs, etc... it's been pointed out by those who own and use (like myself) Sony cams such as the F5, Fs7, Fs700, that excessive fringing appears beyond the amount regularly exhibited by a lens or lens adapter combo. Many theories as to why, but the exact cause doesn't seem to be determined.

Of course. But its known to be exacerbated by Sony cams for some reason. I also have experienced it first hand. The cause, whether codec, compression, gamut, bit depth, etc..,or combination of these seems to still be up for debate. Even with cinema glass and more expensive cams it can occur. Google's your friend.

Severe chromatic aberration in every pic.

Congrats on the Vimeo staff pick. Your work looks amazing. I posted the link to your short earlier in one of Ed's posts (probably not the best place), but I was curious if Ed had seen it. (bought the F35 myself thanks to you and Ed.)

The 16-28 from GL had the same price as Tokina when I was looking to purchase. (About $500 cheaper now). When researching lenses for my F35, I learned both the 16-28 and 50-135 breathe fairly heavy, have roughly 120 degree throw which is on the low end, and are not parfocal with adapters. I wouldn't say they have any "great advantage" over a third party rehouse.

You could be right. Just gave a heads up as noted. Currently though, these rehoused ART's are right in line with budget modern FF Pl mount glass, outside of Xeen. Are you saying you think people want Rokinon style?

Probably already aware of these, but just in case. (about halfway down the page) http://www.glcinemod.com/english.html

Thanks for giving the lut/grading info you had. I have yet to see any films shot on digital cameras replicate the look from some of the classic mid 80's to late 90's films. Extremely smooth highlights, pinkish Caucasian skintones, neutral, well lit look with natural looking saturated colors, plenty of detail/texture, yet soft/smooth, with beautiful grain to top it off. Also, have you watched your cult leaders new release?

Love the grade. Reminds me somewhat of late 80's to mid 90's film looks, which I love. I've been trying to replicate the look by grabbing stills from Ferris Bueller, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, Breakfast Club etc..and trying to match. Any luts used as a starting point?

You can give the best possible calibration money can buy to any display. You are still limited by the hardware capabilities of the display. (for example, calibrating a monitor that displays a single color.) Like cpc mentioned, calibration doesn't guarantee correct colors. Most so-called “calibration” is altering the video cards data, not the display itself. Thus “calibrating” an Apple display or equivalent is not calibration at all, but a relatively crude approximation by the video card to emulate the target, and can even make things worse.

I am also curious about the attributes you value most in a lens (and why you made a comparison with the Fujinon 14.5-45?) The value of that lens is based on the build, mechanics, serviceability, and how close it matches other lenses in the series both optically and mechanically as you are well aware. The optical characteristics of a lens is an aesthetic choice when it comes to visual arts. Fun to compare prices though!

"Doesn't the mirror smash into the back of the glass?" I lock it at about 30mm. Can probably get wider, but don't want to risk it. Obviously there are better lens choices, just wanted to note it's possible.

just remove the plastic guard. I've put the Canon 17-55is on my 1DC.

The fs5 seems like a practical cam, but unfortunately, raw from the fs5 is not yet a known commodity. Plenty of discussion from those who came from fs700raw unhappy with the raw from the fs7 being sub par. Will be interesting!

Quite a few firmware updates since you sold your fs700/7q ! Just installed their newest last night. In the context of the fs700 though, you are correct. I just wanted to mention the odyssey can record 4k prores from other cams, without the need for the raw package (which now is all inclusive, instead of needing separate raw uprgrades). Options are confusing when CD is always upgrading:) Trying it with the Odyssey? You'll have to let us know what you think vs your current cams. (C100ii and Gh4 right?) Also, if you are using the Odyssey, their remote trigger is very handy ($80)

use ppros media browser to open dng folders one at a time. (instead of import) or Use this method to import multiple dng folders: click import, browse to the folder containing dng folders > type 00000 into the search box > select the clips you want and import. I would use AE, ACR, PS, or Resolve (easiest imo). Ppro supposedly is basically letting you view the file to edit, but you give up the advantages of shooting raw in the first place. (at least with CD dng's). The fs700 needs firmware 3.01 for 4k. I don't believe the 7q or 7q+ needs the CD raw upgrade for up to 4k 30p prores, but does for raw or any Cd raw to prores variation for the fs700. bulky is an apt description, but the fs700 is actually about 2oz. lighter than 1dxii and can be easier to shoot with depending on the environment. (not including 7q of course, but if nds, mattebox, and monitor are needed for the 1dxii, weight is again comparable) The fs700 +7q files (both raw and prores) are very malleable. I think someone who likes ml raw will be satisfied with the 4k raw of the fs700. *my perspective comes from currently owning fs700,1dc,F35,7d

Making your struggle even more difficult: Tiffen has software that simulates most, if not all, of their filters in a plugin.

The Trump lens series is a perfect match for the F35, right down to the black and gold! I wanted to get a general idea of the look from the Trump series of lenses in a simple natural daylight setting without flaring. Realize there are a million variables, attributes, characteristics, mechanics, etc... The optical characteristics the Trump lenses are most famous for (wide open low contrast, flaring, custom bokeh) are not shown here. Camera settings: 1DC iso 400, roughly 180 degree shutter, standard profile, daylight wb, 4k 8bit 422 (log is my preference, but wanted to use a profile all Canon cameras have in common so it would be easier to see the lenses characteristics without a custom grade getting in the way) F35 cine ei mode, adjusted exposure slightly in Resolve, slog, sgamut, 180 degree shutter, daylight wb., 1920x1080 12bit 444 dpx, upscaled to uhd (for easier comparison to the 1dc files) keep in mind the scaling probably doesn't do the F35 any favors. Apertures: T3.1 very roughly for the Canon and Trump, T3.9 on the Cooke I used latest version of Adobe media encoder to export tiffs with best settings possible. I delogged the F35 footage in Resolve with Sony's F35 Aces input transform with an srgb output. Captured stills and exported as tiffs from Resolve 12. Below are low res jpegs. Srgb Tiffs to download here :https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6dC48Sfvqr4c3k1aVh4UkhBS2M&usp=sharing

No internal raw. Simultaneous video to sd and external raw. Mitch Gross of cd is the source.

I went to see the 3 hour roadshow version at one of the locations in Florida with the custom 70mm projectors installed. The attributes of film were magical and did not dissapoint. In my opinion it kicks the best digital has to offer to the curb. The overture and intermission were also a classy throwback, but........in spite of the amazing format and talent, the whole thing left me empty and uninspired. Extremely long drawn out takes seemingly unnecessary to the story. Stage like lighting. Unmotivated to the scene nuclear highlights (table tops inside cabin). Racial themes that left one wondering whether Tarantino intended for the audience to laugh uneasily or have empathy for the characters. At the very least I expect to be mildly entertained and at best to gain insight or a perspective from another's point of view. It's like experiencing the most expensive meal on the menu and then after digesting it, realize a simple homemade meal is far more tasteful and satisfying.

Not sure if you mean fs7 or fs5, but, since you mention raw output: On another thread in another forum there is a discussion about Sonys implementation of 12 bit raw from the fs700 and the fs7. Mitch from cd, Alistair Chapman, and some others in the industry weigh in. In short, it appears that unlike the fs700, the raw from the fs7 is worse quality than the internal video. Not sure how the raw of the fs5 will be implemented, but in the case of the fs7 it is at best questionable.

I liked your post on another forum where you had users guess which was of the clips presented was film. Sad you didn't get more responses. I couldn't believe how easily the 3 people I showed (none are into cameras or movies) picked out the film clips and thought they looked best.